Durham report finds FBI probe into Trump-Russia ties was flawed

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Yet, something seems to have influenced the FBI enough too act unusually hastily on "raw and unconfirmed intelligence" when it started the Russia-Trump investigation(s).

 

Cover-ups will be hard to prove if elements of the FBI itself are possibly involved. 

The point of Durham's investigation was to establish that there was some sort of conspiracy in the Justice Dept against Trump. Had the FBI wanted to screw him over all they would have had to have done was leak that there was an on ongoing investigation of Trump's Russia ties during the campaign. Peter Strzok, who was maligned for writing emails bashing Trump was on that team. Yet, somehow, word never leaked out. Give up already.

[ozimoron]

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

What Durham says in his report is:

That the FBI probe was “seriously flawed” with no grounding evidence and that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”

 

And that:

“(Hillary) Clinton allegedly approved a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to tie Trump to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server,”. 

 

In other words it was a hoax, likely instigated by Clinton and the DNC, which had far-reaching detrimental effects for Trump, and was, having begun in mid 2016, an attempt at election interference. 

 

 

"allegedly". That means that even Durham couldn't produce that evidence.

[Walker88]

Legal experts: John Durham made false statements to Congress about Trump-Russia probe

https://news.yahoo.com/legal-experts-john-durham-made-145839097.html

 

No surprise here. As I wrote in a post that was deleted, people I know who were questioned by Durham's team all said the same thing: he was goal seeking and had no interest in the facts nor the intel that was uncovered during the entire investigation.

 

Durham refused to pursue the Campaign Manager manafort's trip to Spain to give konstantin kilimnik---a GRU asset---internal polling data for the GRU's "Internet Research Agency". The IRA then microtargeted voters in key swing States with false stories about HRC and other Dems, using the data manafort gave kilimnik.

 

Durham also refused to pursue the intel that showed roger stone was in constant contact with Julian Assange at Wikileaks, and had a heads up on what things (like Podesta emails) would be leaked and when. In a trump rally, trump actually said that "next week, there's going to be some really interesting information coming out about the Dems".

 

Durham also did not think the meeting in trump tower between trump, jr, manafort, jared and a russian woman was significant, despite the email exchange where trump, jr was told:

 

"that the session was part of a secret Russian plot to support his father's campaign.", to which trump, jr responded by email: "I love it !"

 

Durham did not care, and now---according to this article---he lied to Congress, too.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

Legal experts: John Durham made false statements to Congress about Trump-Russia probe

https://news.yahoo.com/legal-experts-john-durham-made-145839097.html

 

No surprise here. As I wrote in a post that was deleted, people I know who were questioned by Durham's team all said the same thing: he was goal seeking and had no interest in the facts nor the intel that was uncovered during the entire investigation.

 

Durham refused to pursue the Campaign Manager manafort's trip to Spain to give konstantin kilimnik---a GRU asset---internal polling data for the GRU's "Internet Research Agency". The IRA then microtargeted voters in key swing States with false stories about HRC and other Dems, using the data manafort gave kilimnik.

 

Durham also refused to pursue the intel that showed roger stone was in constant contact with Julian Assange at Wikileaks, and had a heads up on what things (like Podesta emails) would be leaked and when. In a trump rally, trump actually said that "next week, there's going to be some really interesting information coming out about the Dems".

 

Durham also did not think the meeting in trump tower between trump, jr, manafort, jared and a russian woman was significant, despite the email exchange where trump, jr was told:

 

"that the session was part of a secret Russian plot to support his father's campaign.", to which trump, jr responded by email: "I love it !"

 

Durham did not care, and now---according to this article---he lied to Congress, too.

The linked article does not detail what was "misrepresented" but just rambles on to Schiff and the Mueller Report.

 

At least Schiff has finally been called out for his lying ways:

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/437/text

 

'Whereas for years Representative Schiff abused this trust by citing evidence of collusion that—as is clear from reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and Special Counsel Durham—does not exist'

 

Extract from above link.

 

 

[ozimoron]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The linked article does not detail what was "misrepresented" but just rambles on to Schiff and the Mueller Report.

 

At least Schiff has finally been called out for his lying ways:

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/437/text

 

'Whereas for years Representative Schiff abused this trust by citing evidence of collusion that—as is clear from reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and Special Counsel Durham—does not exist'

 

Extract from above link.

 

 

A highly partisan House run by MAGA nutjobs criticising Schiff is evidence?

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

A highly partisan House run by MAGA nutjobs criticising Schiff is evidence?

Their system. What can you do?

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Their system. What can you do?

I guess you don't disagree then.

[Walker88]

20 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The linked article does not detail what was "misrepresented" but just rambles on to Schiff and the Mueller Report.

 

At least Schiff has finally been called out for his lying ways:

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/437/text

 

'Whereas for years Representative Schiff abused this trust by citing evidence of collusion that—as is clear from reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and Special Counsel Durham—does not exist'

 

Extract from above link.

 

 

You LINK is to a partisan nuthouse currently with the wingnuts in the majority. That's like a Hatfield saying he doesn't like a McCoy (a US reference). Those are the same clowns who voted against certifying a free and fair election. Their credibility is zero.

 

Back when Repubs were the Senate majority, and thus chaired SSCI, they released a 1000 page report noting 140 contacts between trump campaign officials and russians. As for Mueller, he was severely limited in what he was allowed to pursue. He was prohibited from looking into finance, such as Deutsche Banks SIVs.

 

Durham was not limited, but willfully chose not to pursue even the contacts the Republican SSCI report noted.

 

As I said, those interviewed by Durham and his team said he was completely uninterested in the actual intelligence, such as kilimnik/manafort, stone/assange, the trump tower meeting, etc. What sort of investigation ignores the VERY REASON why Crossfire Hurricane was pursued?

 

Yes, a biased, goal-seeking one.

 

It might be time for the Third Derivative: an investigation of the investigator of the investigators.

[ozimoron]

MAGA Republicans are once again trying to intimidate the DOJ against Jan. 6 indictments

 

"Trumpist Republicans know their propaganda worked, at least for a while. It’s precisely why, now that the law is coming down on Trump, they’ve launched a full-on blitz against DOJ and any other agents of accountability in sight," the report states.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/maga-intimidate-gop/

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, nauseus said:

The linked article does not detail what was "misrepresented" but just rambles on to Schiff and the Mueller Report.

Really?

"The more complete story is that they met, and it was a ruse, and they didn't talk about Mrs. Clinton," Durham answered, repeating a claim from the Trump camp when the meeting was revealed in 2017.

But the report from special counsel Robert Mueller indicates that the Russian Counsel, lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, did discuss Clinton. According to the report, Veselnitskaya had stated the Ziff brothers, owners of an American family investment broke Russian laws and donated profits to the Clinton Campaign or the DNC even though no evidence of wrongdoing was found."

 

And if his various claims of ignorance of events is true, then he was clearly unqualifed to conduct the investigation. But the odds of it being true are minimal.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Walker88 said:

You LINK is to a partisan nuthouse currently with the wingnuts in the majority. That's like a Hatfield saying he doesn't like a McCoy (a US reference). Those are the same clowns who voted against certifying a free and fair election. Their credibility is zero.

 

Back when Repubs were the Senate majority, and thus chaired SSCI, they released a 1000 page report noting 140 contacts between trump campaign officials and russians. As for Mueller, he was severely limited in what he was allowed to pursue. He was prohibited from looking into finance, such as Deutsche Banks SIVs.

 

Durham was not limited, but willfully chose not to pursue even the contacts the Republican SSCI report noted.

 

As I said, those interviewed by Durham and his team said he was completely uninterested in the actual intelligence, such as kilimnik/manafort, stone/assange, the trump tower meeting, etc. What sort of investigation ignores the VERY REASON why Crossfire Hurricane was pursued?

 

Yes, a biased, goal-seeking one.

 

It might be time for the Third Derivative: an investigation of the investigator of the investigators.

Well the whole US Gov seems to be rather partisan and nutty these days.

[placeholder]

58 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Well the whole US Gov seems to be rather partisan and nutty these days.

An obvious both-sidesism ploy.

Edited June 24, 2023 by placeholder